Are you? Let me help: Notice the "and." Then: "The pushing of environment activists -- like the Sunrise Movement -- will continue, despite predictable...
If those were the only choices, and there was even a chance that Goebbels would be less damaging than Hitler, or that there would be even a slightly b...
See if you can understand this for now the 100th time: Being in ontology does NOT refer exclusively to sentient entities. But feel free to go on ignor...
It is indeed a stupid comparison- but you’re the only one making it. Trump was more damaging, so the easy choice is to vote against Trump. Doesn’t mea...
It’s a trivial decision that takes a few seconds. The important work of activism, educating, organizing, unionizing, protesting, creating programs, et...
Yes, we know taking three seconds to vote against Trump was too hard a choice for you. Biden is indeed better than Trump on the environment, and the p...
:lol: I like a lot of what Rand said but she’s very simplistic indeed. Imagine equating with values and happiness with wealth creation. No wonder she ...
Very true, although I’d argue I’m being realistic. Nevertheless, as I said, I’m not by any means using it as an excuse to give up, because I never rea...
What Chomsky points out is trivial -- he's saying there's a genetic component to language, and that's all. I've never understood why this is controver...
Another interesting passage worth mulling over: So again, from the very beginning of Western thought, we've been oriented towards thinking as presence...
Yeah, but that sounds like ordinary people -- who I don't necessarily blame. I blame the people at the top, the corporate, political, and intellectual...
There's an important point where he uses awareness -- or at least that's how the Robinson version translates it: (p. 48 H26, B&T) This entire passage ...
So nearly nothing came out of COP26, as about expected, and we're almost certainly facing an unparalleled destruction in human history. In other words...
Sure, but Marx's influence has been rather diminished as well. Frankly I never cared much about Hegel's influence or Marx's philosophical positions --...
Right, in the same way "human being" isn't used. The terms are too loaded to use. But if we throw out the subject/object distinction, and read it more...
No. I'll reflect your level of politeness. Unpack what you mean in the second sentence for me a bit, if you please. Yes. How many people truly questio...
The "is" discussion isn't of that much interest to me. The main points I wanted to make are as follows: (1) From the Greek inception onward, being has...
:yawn: Yes, we know. Very original take. This thread isn't about Heidegger. If you have nothing to contribute, then there's no sense continuing. Go st...
It's not the definition in ontology. Objects are beings, like everything else. They're beings. That's not what "noumenal" means. Numbers are not "noum...
This is excellent. I'm surprised I've missed this thread for so long. Two small points: 1) I'd differentiate "work" from a "job." You seem to be using...
No, I'm saying persistence and becoming, stability and change, are "in" being themselves. There's the being of stasis and the being of change. So bein...
I don't think this is fair. It can be said of Kant and Hegel as well. Heidegger is difficult, yes, but open to everyone. If I can make sense of it, an...
No one is saying that there aren’t differences between beings. Of course apes are different from rocks. But they’re still entities, beings. To say an ...
I don’t consider it controversial, I consider it irrelevant to ontology. If we define beings as sentient beings and “things”as everything else, there’...
I’m not re-defining the term. This is the historical usage. If you want to restrict the meaning of beings exclusively to human being (or sentient bein...
It's not a view of time. Persistence and becoming both presuppose being. They are also thought of in terms of the present-at-hand, as things that pers...
Beings are things, yes. Rocks, trees, particles, love, music, toothpaste, apes, snakes, numbers...you get the point. The fundamental ontological disti...
I fail to see how, if it’s a matter of definition, but so be it. I like to think I’m intense with everything I care about. :strong: In that case there...
I'd like to redirect the conversation to something I pointed out earlier. I'm surprised no one took issue with it. It's crucial to the OP and (my read...
In ontology, being is not restricted to human beings or sentient beings. It's a matter of terminology. We can make all kinds of distinctions, and we d...
Right -- remember what Trump said once, that he's the "king of debt." Borrowing, debt, bankruptcy, bailouts. I admire the way the wealthy have rigged ...
I wouldn't say that to exist means becoming and not stasis. In that case we're in the being/becoming distinction again, only taking the side of the la...
"Buy, borrow, die." This is what the rich do to avoid taxes. They avoid income taxes because they don't have "income," they mostly have stock. They bo...
What a joke. Capital gains tax is less than income and payroll taxes for ordinary Americans, when looking at percentage of income, not absolute number...
Comments